get_message

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the `messages:read` auth requirement and the endpoint, but says nothing about the response contents, error behavior for a missing or malformed UUID, or confirmation that it is a non-mutating read. The Tags line adds no behavioral value.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Very short and front-loaded with purpose, permission, and endpoint. The 'Get Message' heading restating the name and the Tags line are mildly redundant, but nothing impedes comprehension.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-by-UUID tool the essentials are nearly there, but with no annotations and no output schema the description should indicate what a successful response contains or what failure looks like. Auth is covered; return and error behavior are not.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented as path parameters. The endpoint template reinforces which parameter is which, but adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource (get a message), with the REST path confirming the exact endpoint. It is implicitly distinguishable from plural siblings like get_messages via the singular name, but the description does not call out that distinction.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use guidance, alternatives, or exclusions are provided. The required permission is a prerequisite, not usage guidance. An agent must infer from the path template that this fetches one specific message by conversation UUID and message UUID.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.